From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31749 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2004 21:10:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 31687 invoked from network); 16 Nov 2004 21:10:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO eagle5.netburner.com) (209.126.159.74) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 16 Nov 2004 21:10:49 -0000 Received: from warppicard.netburner.com (ip-66-80-176-18.lax.megapath.net [66.80.176.18]) by eagle5.netburner.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iAGKwqK04692 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:58:52 -0800 Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.2.20041116130629.046b13b8@mail.netburner.com> X-Sender: pbreed@mail.netburner.com Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:11:00 -0000 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com From: Paul Breed Subject: Re: GDB is the GNU project's native debugger In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00174.txt.bz2 >- arguably, adopting any bias which inhibits the applicability of GNU's >tools, actually encourages/requires the development of likely proprietary >alternatives in contradiction of GNU's goals, and indirectly reducing >opportunity to fund continued advancements, (which seems quite counter >productive overall). Bingo.... I currently use the gcc toolchain to support an embedded product suite. 3 years ago 50% of my customers were screaming for linux hosted versions of our development environment, libraries and tools, we did that... Today out of several thousand developers using our solution only 2 are hosting on linux. Out gcc, and gdb tools are the only contact many of these people have with the FSF concept I need a good debugging solution, if it can't be GDB then it will be a proprietary solution, I'd much rather it be GDB, but a FSF isolationist approach to GDB will be counter productive. Paul CTO NetBurner....